History
  • No items yet
midpage
Creel v. Creel
149 F.2d 830
D.C. Cir.
1945
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

The appeals in Nos. 8770 and 8823 are dismissed, on motion of appellee, because each was taken from a non-appealable order.1 The judgment of the court in No. 8910 is affirmed, as an examination of the record reveals no error and requires the conclusion that the trial court properly execised its discretion in confirming the order of sale.

Nos. 8770 and 8823 dismissed.

No. 8910 affirmed.

See D.C.Code (1940) § 17 — 101; Butterfield v. Usher, 91 U.S. 246, 248, 23 L. Ed. 318; Dikeman v. Jewel Gold Mining Co., 9 Cir., 2 F.2d 665; Electric Boat Co. v. East Hampton Shipping Co., 2 Cir., 48 F.2d 542; The St. Paul, 2 Cir., 262 F. 1021, certiorari denied, 252 U.S. 578, 40 S.Ct. 344, 64 L.Ed. 725; Fidelity Storage Co. v. Jaques, 61 App.D.C. 337, 62 F.2d 876; King v. Harrington, 35 App.D.C. 111, 115; Cf. Chas. McCaul Co. v. Harr, 51 App.D.C. 111, 113, 276 F. 633, 635.

Case Details

Case Name: Creel v. Creel
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Date Published: May 21, 1945
Citation: 149 F.2d 830
Docket Number: Nos. 8770, 8823, 8910
Court Abbreviation: D.C. Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.